BodaciousBeefBazooka
Go Leafs Go
I had a pretty crazy sales week thus far the game will be nice to finish a strong week and just chillax
GDT: Flames @ Leafs - HOF Game - 7pm TSN
- Thread starter ACC1224
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
I've actually thought they have looked pretty good overall, especially lately and then I just dug into the stats and:
Top 3 NHL teams for every PP category /60 across the board:
Shots attempts/60 on the PP:
1. Leafs
2. Oilers
3. Rangers
Shots on net/60 on the PP:
1. Leafs
2. Oilers
3. Sharks
Scoring Chances/60 on the PP:
1. Leafs
2. Oilers
3. Penguins
Medium Danger Chances/60 on the PP:
1. Leafs
2. Oilers
3. Stars
High Danger Chances/60 on the PP:
1. Oilers
2. Senators
3. Leafs
Expected Goals/60 on the PP:
1. Oilers
2. Leafs
3. Blackhawks
The Leafs biggest problems on the PP so far this year have been not finishing better earlier in the year and not getting enough of them.
Not worried about the lack of secondary scoring. They are getting their chances. It's just a matter of time before the puck goes in.
TBH, its a bit of an outlier when you pair the analytics + eye test of the 3rd and 4th lines and compare it to their actual production.
Engvall - Kampf - Kase @ 5v5
54.97% Chances For
56.44% Shots For/Against
52.08% Expected Goals For
50.00% Actual Goals For/Against
48.00% High Danger Chances For
Ritchie - Spezza - Simmonds @ 5v5
53.92% Chances For
50.88% Shots For/Against
57.82% Expected Goals For
0.00% Actual Goals For/Against (0 goals for, 2 against)
57.14% High Danger Chances For
The bottom 6 production will come. I am fairly confident of that. These figures pretty well align perfectly to what my eyes are telling me. Both lines controlling the shot share, and both lines appear to have the higher quality chances in comparison to their opposing lines.
I am not expecting a massive level of production, but there is no way this wont improve to some degree. At this point their lack of 5v5 production is more of a statistical anomaly then it is not.
I am sure I will get a response with that starts with:
"the problem is, expected results vs. actual results...."
I get that idea as well. We don't win games off of expected results. But we also have 5 wins in our last 6 without any production outside of our core 4 (less 1 goal). It seems like there is a widespread logic that we can expect some negative regression on the core 4 production in the future, and that is where the lack of secondary scoring seems to be a problem. Wherein, if the core 4 don't score, we lose (fair argument). But it also seems unimaginable to expect the bottom 6 to positively regress to the mean.
The bottom 6 has played well. When you play well, you tend to score more than you get scored on. That has not been the case thus far, for whatever reason. I am going to expect that to change.
Call me a fool
TBH, its a bit of an outlier when you pair the analytics + eye test of the 3rd and 4th lines and compare it to their actual production.
Engvall - Kampf - Kase @ 5v5
54.97% Chances For
56.44% Shots For/Against
52.08% Expected Goals For
50.00% Actual Goals For/Against
48.00% High Danger Chances For
Ritchie - Spezza - Simmonds @ 5v5
53.92% Chances For
50.88% Shots For/Against
57.82% Expected Goals For
0.00% Actual Goals For/Against (0 goals for, 2 against)
57.14% High Danger Chances For
The bottom 6 production will come. I am fairly confident of that. These figures pretty well align perfectly to what my eyes are telling me. Both lines controlling the shot share, and both lines appear to have the higher quality chances in comparison to their opposing lines.
I am not expecting a massive level of production, but there is no way this wont improve to some degree. At this point their lack of 5v5 production is more of a statistical anomaly then it is not.
I am sure I will get a response with that starts with:
"the problem is, expected results vs. actual results...."
I get that idea as well. We don't win games off of expected results. But we also have 5 wins in our last 6 without any production outside of our core 4 (less 1 goal). It seems like there is a widespread logic that we can expect some negative regression on the core 4 production in the future, and that is where the lack of secondary scoring seems to be a problem. Wherein, if the core 4 don't score, we lose (fair argument). But it also seems unimaginable to expect the bottom 6 to positively regress to the mean.
The bottom 6 has played well. When you play well, you tend to score more than you get scored on. That has not been the case thus far, for whatever reason. I am going to expect that to change.
Call me a fool
Michael HOMERUNing
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2019
- 2,497
- 2,374
For anyone freaking out at the "Lack" of production down the lineup, lets just compare this with the "dream" model that is the mighty Lou Lamoriello's of NY
NYI bottom 6 Actual production:
15pts, 63GP, 0.24pts/game
Leafs bottom 6 Actual production:
18 pts, 84GP, 0.22 pts/game
NYI bottom 6 Actual production:
15pts, 63GP, 0.24pts/game
Leafs bottom 6 Actual production:
18 pts, 84GP, 0.22 pts/game
zeke
The Dube Abides
- Mar 14, 2005
- 66,937
- 36,957
the issue is that this isn't just a "this year" problem.
Leafs were #1 in expected goals on the PP last year. But the PP ended up a glaring weakness anyways.
and I think the disconnect is precisely the lack of the kind of golden chances that Ritchie pass to Willy provided last game.
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 78,340
- 45,578
PromisedLand
I need more FOOD
before you blurt things like this out take a few minutes to think....
fyi
Who is the most universally likeable guy in the league?
Seems to be the team every analytic nay-sayer wishes we had. Seems appropriate to demonstrate just how effective their bottom 6 is from an actual Pt. Production standpoint.
My point was, our bottom 6 is playing well. They are not losing games for us 1 bit. Keep the status quo IMO.
If anything we can expect an uptick in production from them.
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 78,340
- 45,578
ah I think there was plenty discussion surrounding the lack of secondary scoring prior to my rant. But I'll keep it to a minimum going forward
therealkoho
Him/Leaf/fan
maybe they'll start it at 6:30 so they can get the puck dropped by 8!
Thats not quite true but pretty close.
Even though the Leafs finished up with the 3rd highest xGF on the PP by the end of the year, their problem seemed to be rooting in not being able to hit the net of all things.
Leafs ranking from the beginning of the season until the end of March on the PP last year (1st 36 games):
Shots attempts/60 on the PP: 7th
Shots on net/60 on the PP: 4th
Scoring Chances/60 on the PP: 1st
High Danger Chances/60 on the PP: 1st
Expected Goals/60 on the PP: 1st
Shooting%: 10th (15.66)
Goals scored/60 on the PP: 3rd
Leafs ranking on the PP the rest of the year (final 20 games):
Shots attempts/60 on the PP: 11th
Shots on net/60 on the PP: 14th
Scoring Chances/60 on the PP: 5th
High Danger Chances/60 on the PP: 6th
Expected Goals/60 on the PP: 4th
Shooting%: 29th (6.25)
Goals scored/60 on the PP: 29th
Fewer attempts, waaay fewer shots on target and just a drop in overall effectiveness. This year seems to have corrected to the underlying stats of the good part of last year. I wonder how much the injuries to Matthews/Simmonds (who were so good in that early part of he season) may have played into shooting% falling apart in the 2nd half but things look like they are trending upwards atm.
HamiltonNHL
Resigning Marner == Running it back
- Jan 4, 2012
- 22,710
- 13,885
Aus34Matt
Registered User
- Dec 10, 2017
- 388
- 524
Guess Babs was right the whole time that you always start your #1 in a B2B.
PROUD PAPA
Registered User
- Sep 20, 2021
- 3,054
- 3,482
Don't tolerate any shit from this team tonight. Their "stick work" from one of last year's games was responsible for Matthews injured wrist. If they pull any bullshit it needs to be responded to pronto.
zeke
The Dube Abides
- Mar 14, 2005
- 66,937
- 36,957
evolving hockey has them at 8.98xgf/60 (#1) in the first 36gms last year, and 8.77xgf/60 (#5) in the last 20gms.
10.56xgf/60 (#2) so far this year.
IMO theres great chances and then there's GREAT chances. Too few of the kind of chances Willy got last game imo - and those kinds of chances where the D is sucked in leaving one of our snipers alone on the wing was something I thought for sure Mitch at bumper would create more of.
Gary Nylund
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2013
- 31,704
- 25,547
For me personally, I wouldn't call myself an "analytic nay-sayer", but I believe that stats rarely tell the whole story.
I don't wish that we had NYI as our team, but I do have a healthy respect for what they've accomplished in the playoffs the last few years. They've beaten some very good teams while we can't seem to beat anyone, even when we're massive favourites.
I think it's kind of ridiculous to mock the "analytic nay-sayers" using stats from less than a dozen games from the beginning of the regular season, no make that not kind of, but completely ridiculous. You showed that our bottom 6 has a PPG that is only slightly worse then theirs, is this supposed to make us proud or what?
I've been told for several years now that NYI is a mirage, we're a much better team. Come to think of it, I've been hearing the same thing about Boston for about 4 years now.
Get back to us when we outperform somebody in the playoffs. It's November, we're tied for 15th overall, at this point we've accomplished sweet f*** all.
I have a feeling tonight's going to be a great game, I sure hope so. GLG!!
I hear what you thinking but I thought Marner looked rather awkward in the bumper and just looking at the Leafs rankings since Oct. 28th:
Shots attempts/60 on the PP: 1st
Shots on net/60 on the PP: 1st
Scoring Chances/60 on the PP: 1st
High Danger Chances/60 on the PP: 1st
Expected Goals/60 on the PP: 1st
Shooting%: 3rd (25%)
Goals scored/60 on the PP: 1st
I think I'm good with them doing what they have been doing. How about you?
It's not that I am mocking the analytic nay-sayers. I just think the expected vs reality is a common narrative on here. Analytic supporters often refer to the expected, whereas the naysayers show the reality. When in actuality they both are very relevant.
Seeing promise in expected results while the actual results are not there should give you grounds to keep the status quo, whereas negative expected results in conjunction with poor actual results should be used as fuel for change.
My whole point was not to mock the NYI and their construction. I have a ton of respect for what they've done. My point was simply to identify that we are not all that far off.
The argument was posed that we are not getting the production we need from our bottom 6. I can't argue that. They are not producing at a level we'd like.
But they are playing very well IMO, and I expect their production to improve based on what I see with my eyes, and the data that supports it. That's all
in other words, I don't see fuel to change/panic
Fogelhund
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2007
- 24,402
- 29,545
| Player | GF/60 | GA/60 |
| David Kampf | 1.1 | 2.6 |
| Jason Spezza | 1.3 | 2.1 |
| Nick Ritchie | 0.4 | 2 |
| Ondrej Kase | 1.6 | 2.7 |
| Pierre Engvall | 1.2 | 2 |
| Wayne Simmonds | 1.4 | 2.3 |
For reference sake, this is the Islanders... though the strange thing is, they only seem to be dressing 11 forwards on many nights.
| Casey Cizikas | 10:53 | 1.5 | 1 |
| Cal Clutterbuck | 11:04 | 1.5 | 1 |
| Matt Martin | 11:15 | 1.8 | 0 |
| Oliver Wahlstrom | 11:19 | 2.4 | 2.4 |
| Jean-Gabriel Pageau | 12:54 | 2.3 | 1.8 |
| Josh Bailey | 14:01 | 2.3 | 3.5 |
| Alexander Barabanov | 13 | 8:36 | 0.2 | 1.6 | 1.1 | |
| Travis Boyd | 20 | 8:46 | -6.9 | 3.4 | 3.1 | |
| Jason Spezza | 54 | 8:53 | -0.2 | 3.1 | 2.5 | |
| Jimmy Vesey | 30 | 10:00 | -5.5 | 2.4 | 3.2 | |
| Adam Brooks | 11 | 10:06 | -2.1 | 3.2 | 1.1 | |
| Wayne Simmonds | 38 | 10:11 | -1.1 | 1.4 | 1.6 | |
| Pierre Engvall | 42 | 11:17 | -0.3 | 2.4 | 2.2 | |
| Joe Thornton | 44 | 11:47 | 4.8 | 3.1 | 2.4 | |
| Alexander Kerfoot | 56 | 12:19 | -3.9 | 2.2 | 2.2 | |
| Ilya Mikheyev | 54 | 12:28 | -3.4 | 2.1 | 1.7 |
Oh... and there is a hockey game tonight, so Go Leafs Go.
Last edited:
Gary Nylund
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2013
- 31,704
- 25,547
zeke
The Dube Abides
- Mar 14, 2005
- 66,937
- 36,957
I'd like to have seen them stick with Marner in the bumper a bit longer tbh. It really should work.
But anything that works at this point - and yes definitely they've been improving on the PP lately.
- Status
